I think I'm losing confidence in Microchip's compiler expertise...

What's the point again of defining the SFR addresses in the linker =20
instead of in the C include files?
It seems to prevent a significant slew of "obvious" optimizations, and =20
there is still a huge per-chip source include as well, so it's not =20
really moving any chip dependencies to link time...

     digitalWriteFast(3,1);  // compiles to LATxSET =3D b
9d00135c:       24020001        li      v0,1
9d001360:       3c03bf88        lui     v1,0xbf88
9d001364:       ac6260e8        sw      v0,24808(v1)
     digitalWriteFast(3,0);  // compiles to LATxCLR =3D b
9d001368:       3c03bf88        lui     v1,0xbf88
9d00136c:       ac6260e4        sw      v0,24804(v1)

Love that double load of identical constants!

Is this the sort of thing that Microchip's "global optimization" fixes?

Grr.
BillW

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.